Metal detecting is purely about love of history: UPDATE

The Friends of the Stroud Museum have received enough donations for the Museum to purchase the Roman coins, and to put them on display in the Museum’s archaeology room.

A passing metal detectorist might well have commented

Thank goodness this is over. This has reflected appallingly on the people of Stroud, taking such a long time to raise £225 for the finder, Wayne. He’s been a real brick, waiting patiently like this for true justice. Like us all, he’s an absolute hero, who does it entirely for the love of history.

We have to agree. He is a marvel, and the people of Stroud – nay, the whole population of Gloucestershire, should hang their heads in shame for their delay in paying him his cash. Anyone would think it was their heritage, not his and they expected him to DONATE the finds!

In the words of a detectorist hero on Minelabowners.com:

With all due respect to the museum if i had travelled 500 miles to a rally i would not want to give my hard earned finds to anyone unless a reasonable reward was offered to me.

Quite right. It is heartening that Britain has entrusted the decision on whether it gets to see its history to such generous, sophisticated and enlightened people.

Or is it? The general public must consider the matter carefully. As ought the quiet, thoughtful wing of the metal detecting hobby.

3 comments

I actually am Wayne Jacobs the finder and I am appalled by the way this article on the Nailsworth hoard ignores any fact, stirs up friction and viciously attacks an innocent member of the law abiding public.
1) I am a detector user who has an honours Degree in Archaeology, considerable dig-experience and friends in heritage ….so I know more about heritage than the writer!
2)I have metal detected since 1978 and researched and logged much field/local history.
3) Permission is gained from all landowners,all finds identified mapped and reported to the authorities/museums/coin indexes etc.
4) I dont sell any finds …..donating many to museums inthe last 30 years eg the beautiful Stoke Gifford Middle Bronze Age Spearhead in Bristol Museum was DONATED to the Museum.This is still sharp its edges and would now be destroyed under a housing estate.
5)The 9 roman siliquae in questionwere a hoard declared Treasure Trove and offered to Cirencester museum. They didnt want them…they were returned to me and I was told I could dispose of them as I liked. BUT….THEY WERE THE ‘NAILSWORTH HOARD’…to me the people of Nailsworth should have them for posterity?. Half the coins value were the landowners property- fact…..so I approached Stroud museum’s curator who had nowhere to display them or money to buy them! I persevered though over 3 months and the curator and I hatched a plan as their roman room hadbeen flooded and the whole place was getting a revamp. As a perfect PR plan for the museum a fund was set upto pay the landowner off for the coins and to fund the museum and publisise the new opening. IT WORKED AS PEOPLE CAME FROM ALL OVER TO SEE THE COINS AND NEW MUSEUM.
The museum acquired the coins at below market price from me deliberately so they conserved their funds.
As you can see….its about time you got your facts right in these articles and stopped writing inflammatory junk, as some of us are truthful, honest and an asset to this country’s heritage. Without my determination 9 significant coins would have been completely lost to the people of Nailsworth and future generations. WJacobs.

Every detectorists says THEY behave well but that completely misses the point. Most don’t. They don’t donate their finds and they don’t report them. If you have a degree in Archaeology you will know that random, selective recreational metal detecting is not in accordance with EH’s Guidelines for metal detecting in archaeological projects and conflicts with all the basic archaeological principles (and would also get you jailed in many countries for good reasons well understood abroad!)

Accordingly, it can’t therefore be justified if you believe in treating the resource properly. In view of all that, for you to say you know better than the writer is a joke.

As a minimum it should be regulated by statute and you will not find an archaeologist that disagrees with that, our main call. So we totally reject your accusation of inflammatory junk. If you wish to be a true friend of heritage you should be supporting our call for control of the awful behaviour of the majority of your artefact hunter colleagues and desist from attacking those who point out the scale of the cultural damage they are causing.

You clearly don’t get it, and should think about the reality – not of what you do but what most of your “colleagues” do. Every time a detectorist praises themselves they project a false positive image of most of metal detecting and help the majority to continue to act badly. You should openly acknowledge that fact and support our aims.